Yager v. Clauson

5 Citing cases

  1. Tamposi v. Denby

    136 F. Supp. 3d 77 (D. Mass. 2015)   Cited 2 times

    To establish legal malpractice under New Hampshire law, under either a contract or tort theory, a plaintiff must prove (1) the existence of an attorney-client relationship, "which placed a duty upon the attorney to exercise reasonable professional care, skill and knowledge in providing legal services to that client;" (2) a breach of that duty; and (3) "resultant harm legally caused by that breach." Yager v. Clauson , 166 N.H. 570, 572–73, 101 A.3d 6, 9 (2014)(citing Estate of Sicotte v. Lubin & Meyer, P.C. , 157 N.H. 670, 674, 959 A.2d 236, 240 (2008). "Whether [an] attorney has breached the applicable standard of care in representing the client is a question of fact to be determined through expert testimony and usually cannot be decided as a matter of law."

  2. Johnson v. ProSelect Insurance Co.

    2013 CV 3981 (Mass. Super. Oct. 12, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    Expert testimony on proximate cause is required in cases where determination of that issue is not one that lay people would ordinarily be competent to make." Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570. 573, 101 A.3d 6 (2014) (quotations omitted). Massachusetts follows a comparable rule in legal malpractice cases.

  3. Johnson v. ProSelect Insurance

    33 Mass. L. Rptr. 637 (Mass. Super. 2016)

    Expert testimony on proximate cause is required in cases where determination of that issue is not one that lay people would ordinarily be competent to make.” Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570 , 573 (2014) (quotations omitted). Massachusetts follows a comparable rule in legal malpractice cases.

  4. Omran v. Bleezarde

    1:15-cv-00190-DBH (D.N.H. Aug. 14, 2015)

    Id.In a legal malpractice action, a plaintiff must demonstrate (1) that an attorney-client relationship existed that imposed a duty on the attorney to exercise reasonable professional care, skill and knowledge in providing legal services to the plaintiff; (2) a breach of that duty; and (3) resulting harm. Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570, 572-73, 101 A.3d 6, 9 (2014). In this case, Plaintiff does not complain about and could not reasonably complain about the ultimate result (i.e., dismissal) that Defendant helped Plaintiff achieve in the underlying criminal matter.

  5. Moore v. Grau

    171 N.H. 190 (N.H. 2018)   Cited 10 times
    Applying law that recognizes a release as an affirmative defense to terms that "read as a covenant not to sue"

    Thus, "[t]o establish legal malpractice a plaintiff must prove: (1) that an attorney-client relationship existed, which placed a duty upon the attorney to exercise reasonable professional care, skill and knowledge in providing legal services to that client; (2) a breach of that duty; and (3) resultant harm legally caused by that breach." Yager v. Clauson, 166 N.H. 570, 572-73, 101 A.3d 6 (2014) (quotation omitted). As the foregoing implies, an action for legal malpractice "is a claim ... for liability ‘unique to and arising out of the rendition of professional services.’ "